- From: Rafal Pietrak <rafal@ztk-rp.eu>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 05:33:12 +0000
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr. " <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Sebastian Zartner <sebastianzartner@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
W dniu 23.07.2015 o 22:39, Tab Atkins Jr. pisze: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Sebastian Zartner > <sebastianzartner@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 19 July 2015 at 08:06, Rafal Pietrak <rafal@ztk-rp.eu> wrote: >>> Hello All, [----------------------] >>> 2. and since only one of them can be right, the others are wrong ... so >>> I'd like to notify respective develoers here (google, mozilla, etc; >>> which I understand frequent this list) of this bug in their >>> implementations; although I con't actually know which one is wrong. >> >> Here's a simplified version of RafaĆ's example: >> >> https://jsfiddle.net/g9zp6psj/1/ >> >> So it looks like Gecko considers relative positioning of table rows >> while Blink and Trident don't. > > Both behaviors are allowed by CSS 2.1, unfortunately. > Isn't it calling for specs revision, then? (I haven't seen the actual wording of the specs, but google returned pointers to "behavior is undefined" in that conext. What is the point in leaving it undefined? I mean is "undefinition" serve any purpose there???) -R
Received on Wednesday, 29 July 2015 19:20:42 UTC